Auraria Membership

r
Dale Due
4 ~7l
CASTLE ROCK COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER
I
* ,r.. i i
MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE THESIS BY:
HAMPTON ISLAN
IN CONJUNCTION WITH:
THE CENTER FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN ADVISOR: ALVARO MALO UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER
September 1979

INTRODUCTION
In February 1978 a committee from the Castle Rock area contacted the Center for Community Development and Design at the University of Colorado at Denver and requested architectural assistance in the design of a recreation facility for the area. Professor Alvaro Malo, Architectural Director for the Center for Community Development and Design (CCDD) accepted the request and took on the role of advisor to Master of Architecture student Hampton Islan who used the opportunity for his thesis project. This booklet is a brief presentation of that thesis project.
From working with various people in Castle Rock; from visiting a number of local community senior and recreation facilities; and from library research; a program for a community recreation center was developed. (The program and much of the research is the appendix to this booklet.) As is stated in the program this is not a final solution to Castle Rock's needs, but rather a proposal of possible appropriate ideas. The hope is that this work will lead the community significantly closer to really pooling energies and moving ahead to develop a facility that will meet the needs of the community.

THE DESIGN
Townspeople suggested that a 15 acre site that was deeded to the town of Castle Rock and is just south of the center of town and adjacent to the county fairgrounds, would be an appropriate site to design for since it is felt that this may ultimately be used for a recreation center.
The property is mostly covered with grasses and cactus and is dominated by a ridge that projects into the center of the land. The site is bounded on the north and east by the fairgrounds, on the west by railroad tracks and on the south by a proposed housing development. Considering the contours of the land, the proposed road under (or over) the train tracks and available views, the decision to locate the building on the central ridge was fairly apparent.
Having decided on a general location for the facility the next decision was how the building should be centered. The choice of a south entry evolved as the ideas came out of having a solid wall of protection on the north and of letting the south side open up to sunlight and people; both part of the energy conscious approach taken. The decision was additionally influenced by design of the approach road, handicapped access and the connection to the parking area.
The building itself is designed to be compact and efficient thereby minimizing energy, staff and maintenance needs. Its usual prominence is aimed at establishing a strong sense of identification and image. It protrudes from the hill-
side in a manner suggestive of Castle Rock. The massive and simple face of the east, west and particularly the north sides and the building massing seems like huge boulders until the south side is seen, then suddenly the building has much more detail, transparency, softness and human scale.
On entering the building the first obvious land- mark is the reception desk. The desk really controls the entire building because entry is monitored and all of the most active spaces where accidents are most likely to occur are within direct sight. The desk controls flow to the areas for which fees would be charged. It also helps separate the active and passive and noisier and quieter areas. The locker rooms are centrally located for direct access to the active recreation areas. A full kitchen adjacent to the meeting room allows for regular preparation of complete meals. The meeting room, crafts room, kitchen and restrooms are all clustered to create a sense of a senior center within the community recreation framework.
Another feature that warrants note is the office area. A common problem in many centers is that the staff go into their offices and "hide" from the public when their job is really to be interact ing with the public. The proposed plan allows a private bathroom and locker area but puts the staff in view and in an interactive position the rest of the time.
Important consideration was also given to large assemblies. Two scales are provided for; the meet ing room can be used as one large space for about

200 300 people, and the gym can be used for concerts, dances, and special events handling around 1500 people. An important consideration to all users is that the plan of the building is easy to understand; the entry and recreation desk (information) is so centrally located that one quickly sees where everything is. An additional goal that this achieves is that someone visiting the center fof once purpose is likely to see activities in other parts of the building. That interaction is one key to expanding individuals' use of the facility, and of course, the reason for building a facility is to use it.
The project title tells an important story. The facility is not just a community center or a recreation center; it is the synergistic sum of the two ideas. By combining the two both gain from each other. It begins to expand the definition of each concept; one can begin to see that all the community activities are part of life's recreation and that all the recreational activities help develop a stronger, healthier community. The real challenge now is to see if a facility that achieves all these goals can be brought into reali ty.

o
o
25 50
SITE PLAN

H1H0N

16

COST ESTIMATE AND SQUARE FOOTAGE
2
- The gross area is 3^,313 ft
- A ball park cost estimate is $1.5 million based on Building Systems Cost Guide 1979 Ath Edition c. 1979-
Pool = 1/3 e $55 / ft2
Gym = 1/3 e $35 / ft2
Commun i ty
Center = 1/3 e $39 / ft2
Total Mean = $A3 / ft2
3A,313 ft2 X $A3/ft2 = $1.47 million
(not including parking site development)
2
The building is within 1500 ft^ of the programmed total, but it includes 2762 ft for the running track and 570 ft^ for a gallery area that were not included in the original estimate.

r^ttss'.s:

HI

APPEND
X

CASTLE ROCK
COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER A PROGRAM PROPOSAL
prepared by: Hampton Islan staff advisor: Alvaro Malo
Center for Community Development and Design University of Colorado at Denver
April 1979
prepared for: Douglas County
Youth Advancement Committee

CASTLE ROCK COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER
A PROGRAM PROPOSAL
A group of citizens, now organized as the Douglas County Youth Advancement Committee, has been working on developing a Community Recreation Center in the Douglas County/Cast1e Rock Area for the benefit of all the people in that area. Working with the Center for Community Development and Design at the University of Colorado at Denver and Master of Architecture student Hampton Islan, this program proposal for a facility has been compiled as a first major step toward the development of a building design.
The approval of this program, or a modification of it, will lead to the next phase, Conceptual Design. Conceptual Design is followed by Preliminary Design and that is as far as the Center for Community Development and Design will carry the project. The Preliminary Design will give the committee and community one possible form that the building might take and thereby also supply a good vehicle for further development and discussion.
The basic reason for developing a Community Recreation Center in Castle Rock is the enrichment of life, both for the individual and the community. This underlying reason takes many forms as it becomes manifest in activity. The Recreation Center will be a place for people to learn, to play, to share, to become physically and mentally strong and invigorated, to develop tangible and intangible skills for coping with the complexities of life, to shed worldly problems and, in general, to take joy in life through active and passive recreation. It will be a place for the community to come together, a place of civic pride. It will also be an asset to the image and growth of the area.
Recreation tends to improve and strengthen individual's perception of themselves, their sense of self-worth and self-sufficiency. This, in turn, improves harmony and health. The welfare of the individual is the basis of the community; and a healthy populous will establish a healthy community and create a viable society. It is also important to recognize the role of the community, particularly in showing the individual his/her unique and important value alone and how that value is multiplied through involvement

in society as a whole. (People who have a healthy involvement in society are not likely.to exhibit "anti-socia1 behavior.") The community must also see to it that everyone, regardless of age, skill, money or any other factor has an adequate opportunity to use the Center. We all learn from the people around us and everyone has room to learn and knowledge to teach or share.
Some key community recreation words are enrichment, interaction, vitality, health, harmony, activity, invigoration, development, involvement, individual and community.
At the present time there are no year-round recreation facilities in Castle Rock or the immediate surrounding area. The only public recreation facilities available are outdoors such as tennis courts, playing fields, nature areas, parks, some picnicking places and the county fairgrounds.
There is also a considerable demand for meeting space for community groups of all kinds. The proposed community recreation center should fill a very considerable gap in the area as a place where most or all of these activity needs can be fulfilled.
In developing the facility there are two primary alternatives; a complete center can be built all at one time, or it can be built in phases.
At this point in the development it seems best that the design should be workable with either alternative. There are arguments on both sides. The primary reason against building the whole facility at once is the large single expenditure. But the argument against building in phases is first that it will cost much more to build in the long-run because of spiraling costs and the repeated costs of opening up the site and second because it is better to complete a task than to leave it partially done because it's so difficult to come back later. It's important to remember, in either case, that once the facility is completely built, initially, it is inevitable that additions and alterations will be made to it as the needs and demands of programs for the community change.
Based on community response, the highest facility priorities are an indoor pool and meeting facilities, next is crafts areas and a gym, followed by raquetbal1/handbal1 courts and a weight exercise area.
As the community grows, use of the available facilities will inevitably grow. This means that the demand for a community recreation center is growing and that once a center is built there will be an increasing demand on

that center. It Is also likely that people will have more leisure time in the future and much of that time will be focused on recreation thereby putting an even more accentuated demand on the facilities available.
The key to the success of the center is to have people return to use it again'and again. There must be programs and facilities that will continue to hold the interest of users. The center has to offer activities that will interest a large portion of the population and as each individual of that population changes it is necessary that there continue to be programs that will bring that individual back again and again. There are two major aspects to this concern. One is that the staff of the center has to generate the programs of activity, and the other is that the building has to include a variety of options and flexibility.
Along the same lines, part of personal growth includes having a variety of experiences. It is important that people have exposure to the various activities that are going on at the center whenever they are there. Interaction with other people as well as awareness of the alternatives available at the center is very important to spurring complete, active and continuing use.
It should be noted that community response has indicated that fees should be charged for various uses of the center. This will help defray the operating costs. Also, it is anticipated that the center will be open from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m, with variations based on the day of the week and use.
The Castle Rock area is close enough to Denver and Colordao Springs that construction materials and techniques available in either of those areas would be available for use in Castle Rock. This opens up an almost limitless array of possibilities.
Some additional general design considerations include:
Character The building should be harmonious with its location and also reflect its importance in the community.
The facility should be a focus of community pride. This should be apparent through sound, durable construction without excess.
Function Both surfaces of every wall and ceiling can be utilized.
Separate wet/dry
act i ve/pass i ve loud/quiet fee/non-fee user/service-delivery

Don't leave, any "dead space" unused.
Allow for future growth and change.
Economy Build with life-cycle costs in mind. Significant initial expenditure can save money in the long-run; it is not good economics to do things in a way that will be inadequate in the near future.
Careful design and choice of materials is critical to holding down operating costs, Operating costs are influenced by the seasons, demand on the facility and utilities costs.
Maintenance is always necessary and should be considered in design and funding.
Put money where it will have the most impact.
Energy A compact building tends to be more energy efficient.
This is a good climate for solar energy. Maximize use of passive solar techn iques.
To conserve energy, hold heat in during the winter and get air circulating during the summer. Earth can be used to stabilize temperatures in some areas.
Some active spaces like gyms, hallways and handball courts, can have lower thermostat settings.
Nature/Light Take advantage of views, solar orientation, slope of the site and other natural qualities.
Use tones, textures and materials that have a direct association with nature.
Natural light is important to people functioning happily and healthily, let it come in.
Glare is a problem that needs to be controlled, generally try to avoid shiny surfaces.
Task lighting is desirable since it focuses attention, saves energy, and breaks up the institutional feeling of general overhead illumination. Safety Safety of people is of the highest priority.
Limit the potential for vandalism of exterior and interior.
Access/Ci rculation Allow for access by the handicapped, infirm and children. Circulation space can be more than just a connector between two places.

SOME FACTS AND FIGURES
- The area served by the facility will be centered around Castle Rock and will include a good bit of the rest of Douglas County. It is estimated that this service area will have a population of 15,000 within the next 5 10 years. Based on a population of 15,000 the age distribution can be
anticipated to be approximately: AGE POPULATION
0-15 5880
16-2*4 1560
25-3*t I960
35"*4*4 2*475
*45-5*4 16*40
55-6*( 810
65-over 675
- The present population of Castle Rock is about 3000.
- The present population of the "commuting area" is about *40,000.
- The percentage distribution by race is broken down as:
96.3% Wh i te
.3% B1 ack
2.8% Spanish Surname
.1% Native American
.5% Other
- "The estimated mean income for 19^91970 for Douglas County was $12,378. The per capita income for persons was $3,272. This level of income both as a mean and per capita value was exceedingly large compared to the national average and other Front Range counties. The income is presently projected to be approximately a mean of $17,000 for 1976. In 1970, most families (21%) made between $15,000 and $25,000 while the next greatest number of families (17.*4%) made $12,000 to $15,000. These two income ranges include 38% of all the families in the county. Seven percent of the families made greater than $25,000 as an average. These figures, in percent of families, have probably increased within the income ranges, rathe than decreased."
"Castle Rock Community Profile," Castle Rock Chamber of Commerce.
"Report on Feasibility Study for Douglas County, Colorado Multi-purpose Recreation Center," John L. Shaw and Associates, Inc.; January 12, 1978
2

ANALVS IS/DESCRIPTION FOR BUILDING SPACES
SPACE: LOBBY/LOUNGE/RECEPTI ON
Qua 1i tat i ve:
Nature of Activity: Supervision; Fees; Information; Waiting; Display;
Sale of Goods; Phoning; Entry; Reading; Relaxing; Socializing; Observ i ng.
Spatial Character: "Top Aesthetics," Interaction (visual) with other Activities the Center Offers; Focus to Reception as Entering, then open up; Casual but Active; Not Trashy.
Functional Relationship: Supervision of areas most prone to troubles;
Direct access to locker rooms; Monitor pulse of activity through out building; Direct tie to office(s), (possibly running one into the other): Close to men's and women's toilets; Vending in sight of desk, but not in lounge; Some secure storage.
Accessibility: Must have easy, direct access for all people (including handicapped and infirm).
Security: This is the center of supervision; Display cases and Goods for sale as well as cash and certain other valuables will have to be kept secure.
Furnishings and Equipment: Some seating: CounterInformation", cashier intercom/p.a., cupboard storage, light controls; Display case--trophies, crafts projects, items for sale; Directory/Supergraphi guides; Pay phone; Recreation equipment storage; Bulletin board; Drinking fountain and vending machines; (Note: Bubbler, phone, etc. should be handicap height); clock.

Lobby/Lounge/Reception continued
Environmental Controls: Air-lock entry; Circuit controls for entire
building; Control solar heat gain; Limit noise from other rooms;
Give shelter for outside waiting, too.
Orientation: Good view from lounge area; Whether north or south entry should get warming sun in winter (shade in summer); Shelter from wind; Visibility to pick-up point for people waiting for rides.
Light: More subdued in lounge area with some strongly "down-1ighted"
spots for reading, task lighting at reception desk; Lower illumination level in more enclosed part of entry then increase level as area opens up to reception desk.
Color/Tone: Greens, browns, natural materials, warm textures in lounge;
Bright, active colors in lobby/reception; Not very dark anywhere.
Special Surfaces: Entry doors must have transparency for safety.; scenic view out and fireplace would be especially good for lounge;
Main traffic routes should be contrasting floor covering from more idle areas.
Quant i tat i ve:
Number of people in space: Lobby/Reception--very high traffic, but
little lingering except for waiting for rides; at desk, up to 5 waiting; Lounge--5 10 people.
Dimensions necessary: Reception desk at least 6' long X 3'-9" (approx.) high Air-lock entry -- double doors -- 7' X 71 minimum
better -- 9 -12 X 71~9'
600-800 ft^ for Lobby/Lounge (P. 1**3 Reference #1)
** Reference may be located at the end of Analysis/Description Section.

SPACE: HANDBALL/RAQUETBALL (HB/RB)
Qua 1i tat i ve:
Nature of Activity: Handball and Raquetball games and instruction; possible use for dance and exercise classes.
Note: Raquetball is extremely popular now, but it's important
to ask what happens if its popularity ebbs. Can the raquetball court be converted to other uses? It can be, but one should remember at this time to construct with full-size doors and adequate electrical and ventilating connections to make future conversion most feasible.
Spatial Character: Straightforward active game space.
Functional Relationship: Easy access from reception and locker rooms,
group all courts together with observation above at back of courts.
Accessibility: See above; door to court must be flush on inside--
recommended for door to open out to hall and have a small window at eye level.
Security: Not a problem.
Furnishings and Equipment: Must have necessary court lines; possible to have recessed attachment points for dance bar and a flush out 1et.
Environmental Controls: Adequate ventilation, leave back of court open to help control acoustics.
Orientation: No exterior concerns; ideal for berming up against,burying, and/or for windowless north wall.

Weight Room continued
Special Surfaces: One wail should be largely glass to allow visual
observation and control from within the center; carpet floor, then have mats under equipment; give walls and/or ceiling acoustic dampening.
Quant i tat i ve:
Number of people in space: 8 (approximately)
2
Dimensions necessary: 18' X 25' X 10' H. ^50 ft (approximately)

PRIMARY RESEARCH SYNOPSIS
CENTER NAME: North Boulder Recreation Center Public
ADDRESS: 3170 Broadway, Boulder, Colorado
APPROXIMATE SIZE: 25,000 ft2 APPROXIMATE COST: $690,000
(building and parking)
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2: $27.6 DATE: 197A
ARCHITECT: Everett-Zeige1
FACILITIES INDOORS: Pool (75' X A5' with shallow "L")
Gym
Weight Room Sauna
Locker Rooms/Showers (Men's and Women's)
Meeting Rooms/Class Rooms with Kitchen Dance Studio
1 Racquetba11/Handba11 Court (201 X A0' X 20')
Men's and Women's Restroom
Director's Office Recept ion Sma11 Off i ce
Crafts Room with wet and dry areas Storage and Mechanical
OUTDOORS: A Tennis Courts
A Shuffleboard Courts
2 Sand-Lot Volleyball Jogg i ng Tra i1 ,
Bike Way Grassy Areas
COMMENTS:
This is a simple attractive center. The natural earth tones give a warm relaxed character. It seems quite compact, yet it has a lot of facilities in it, it also was fairly inexpensive. There is handicap access throughout except for one unfortunate oversight, that is the weight room which is on the second floor in what was intended to be a storage area (no space was originally planned for it). The acoustics are good, this is partially attributed to the fairly loose faced concrete block used throughout the building. The "L" shaped pool is good for recreational use and something pointed out here is that it is best to have the locker rooms join the pool at the shallow end. It was also pointed out here that the wood floors in the gym, handball courts and dance room were a good choice, and that there is always a need for storage space and more locker room/shower room space.

CENTER NAME: South Boulder Recreation Center
Publi c
ADDRESS: 1360 Gillespie Drive, Boulder, Colorado
APPROXIMATE SIZE: 28,000 ft2 APPROXIMATE COST: $750,000
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2; $27 DATE: Finished January 197^
ARCHITECT: Nixon, Brown, Brokaw Â£ Bowen
FACILITIES INDOORS: Pool (25yds X 6 lanes) with shallow "L"
Gym (High School Court)
1 HB/RB Court
Dance Room/Dry Crafts
Weight Room
Class Room/Wet Crafts
Locker Rooms (Men's and Women!s)
Sauna
Reception Desk/Office Community Meeting Room Office
Men's and Women's Restrooms OUTDOORS: A large park including a small lake.
COMMENTS:
Like other centers designed by this architecture firm this one has lots of roof and wall angles giving a sense of complexity. The reception area gives good control of people entering and fairly good control over activity, but there are many areas it is blind to, also; most notably the weight room. Since it is built on two levels with stairs connecting, handicap access is very limited. It doesn't seem like a very warm or inviting place. Many of its finishes look somewhat deteriorated. Its parking is well handled.

CENTER NAME: Boulder Senior Citizens Center
Pub 1i c
ADDRESS: Corner of 9th and Arapahoe, Boulder, Colorado
APPROXIMATE SIZE: lA,500 ft2 APPROXIMATE COST: $1.1 million
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2; $75-9 DATE: 1979 (April or May)
ARCHITECT;- Nixon, Brown, Brokaw & Bowen
FACILITIES INDOORS: Multi-purpose Room
Crafts (wet and dry)
Game Rooms Meeting Rooms Class Rooms
Men's and Women's Restrooms Kitchen Institutional Projection Booth 6 Offices (approximately)
Health Station Library/Quiet Lounge Conference Room Noisy Lounge
OUTDOORS: Grassy Area (picnics, volleyball, classes) Shuffleboard
COMMENTS:
Not open yet, this center is by the same architects as South Boulder Recreation Center and has complex roof and wall angles. Its multi-purpose room is well designed to break into smaller spaces and I would suspect will be well utilized. It's anticipated that the lobby will be the most heavily utilized area serving partly as a lounge, as circulation route, and as a milling area. A couple of odd things are first that the restrooms are fairl unhandy, second a couple of other spaces also seem quite out-of-the-way, and third a noisy area and a quiet area were planned very close together with a meeting room adjacent to both of them. There is very little parking alotted

Publi c
CENTER NAME: Northglenn Community Center
ADDRESS: 11801 Community Center Drive, Northglenn, Colorado
APPROXIMATE SIZE: 44,000 ft2 APPROXIMATE COST: $1.8 million
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2: $40.9 DATE: October 1975 (started July 1974)
ARCHITECT: Nixon, Brown, Brokaw & Bowen
FACILITIES INDOORS: Pool (75' X 45')
2 HB/RB Courts 2 Saunas Pro-Shop Arts & Crafts
Gym Tartan Large (Kitchen adjacent)
Game Room
Th eatre (300 seats)
Community Meeting Room/Dance Room 4 Offices
Locker Rooms (Men's and Women's)
Lounge Areas Ballet Room Weight Room
2 Men's and Women's Restrooms OUTDOORS: (Administered by another department)
COMMENTS:
The same architects who designed this also did South Boulder Recreation Center, and this also has many angles, but is somewhat less complex feeling because of how it is spread out and some parts are hidden by others. A three hundred seat theatre is the most unique aspect of this center.
Although the theatre is fully booked, there is often two weeks or more of preparation time for two evenings of performance; this gives a sense of high cost and limited use. The center also has complete handicap access, but it's awkwardly handled. They have a real circulation problem from the locker rooms to the pool. Central supervision is almost non-existent because of the building layout, therefore it requires more staff. The center seems overly large with poor circulation planning. It is visually fairly interesting and its finish materials seem to have lasted well with a couple of exceptions. Its entry draws you in, but is anti-climactic once you are inside.

CENTER NAME: Westminster Swim and Fitness Center
Publi c
ADDRESS: 3290 W. 76th Avenue, Westminster, Colorado
APPROXIMATE SIZE: 21,6^9 ft2 APPROXIMATE COST: $1.5 million
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2; $69.3 DATE: June 1975 (finished)
ARCHITECT: Everett-Zeigel
FACILITIES INDOORS: Pool (25 yds X ^5') with Steam Room and Whirlpool
Sauna
Weight Room A HB/RB Courts Lounge/Meeting Room/Classes Locker Rooms (Men's and Women's)
Restrooms (Men's and Women's)
3 Offices (2 original)
Snack Bar Area
Large Storage Area in Basement OUTDOORS: 2 Tennis Courts
COMMENTS:
The architects for this center also designed the North Boulder Recreation Center. This is an attractive building (it received an award for its aesthetics) and one of the keys is the use of tones and materials that have a direct association with nature. Although the entry is good and the front desk is well located, supervision is limited and there are some functional problems, particularly that the locker rooms are not directly connected to the pool. Handicap access is possible to all the activity levels by ramps on the outside, not inside. This center does not include a gym.
Their lounge is the last room of a three section meeting room and includes a fireplace and t.v. and overlooks the pool. It was noted that they have outdoor access to mechanical rooms and that that is a good feature.

&
CENTER NAME: Green Mountain Recreation Center Public
ADDRESS: 13198 W. Green Mountain Drive, Lakewood, Colorado
APPROXIMATE SIZE: 17,000 ft2 APPROXIMATE COST: $825,000
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2; $1)8.5 DATE: 1978
ARCHITECT: Chi1dress-Livaudais
FACILITIES INDOORS: Gym (Double size, not full-size) with track above
2 HB/RB Courts Weight Room
Locker Rooms (Men's and Women's)
1 Office
1 A11 Purpose Room
1 Stage/Theatre/Dance Room with Bathroom
Storage below Stage
Sauna
Control Booth
OUTDOORS: 2 Tennis Courts Outdoor Deck
COMMENTS:
This is a very compact center. Some of the spaces, particularly the locker rooms suffer from this tightness, but most areas are quite comfortable and have a dynamic interactive tie to the other areas. There is no pool, but otherwise it seems quite complete. The theatre/stage/dance room is an idea that allows lots of utilization. It also results in some compromise of each function. The entry and reception are well handled so that one doesn't feel confronted, but does get a sense of the place very quickly.
The reception desk is tied directly to the staff office space making both a real hub of activity. Color adds a dynamic thread throughout the place.
The way the gym is open to other areas and yet is contained is very important to the way the building encourages people to become involved, and yet functions within tight confines; it also helps to bring natural light to the gym. Expansion including a pool and more handball courts was anticipated before construction. Some of the outside walls are intended for use as playing surfaces.

CENTER NAME: Sheridan Recreation Center
ADDRESS: 3325 W. Oxford, Sheridan, Colorado
Publi c
APPROXIMATE SIZE: 26,000 ft2 APPROXIMATE COST: $1.0 million
(without pool) (without pool)
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2: $38.5 DATE: June 1978 (opened)
ARCHITECT: James E. Moorehead
FACILITIES INDOORS: Full-size ("double") Carpeted Gym
3 HB/RB Courts Pre-School Room
2 Meeting Rooms with partition and with mirror and dance bar Wet and Dry Crafts Rooms (storage and kiln between)
Game Area (in front of reception desk)
Weight Room
2 Offices (1 large with several desks on 2nd floor) Lobby/Recept ion
Locker Room (Men's and Women's) each has Sauna
OUTDOORS: A Tennis Courts Picnic Area Play Area Playing Fields
COMMENTS:
This center is built-in conjunction with the local high school, public library and a swimming pool facility. It seems to have a lot of excess space, and the association with the pool doesn't seem very well worked out. It has good lighting in general and a richness of textures not usually found in recreation centers. Central control is O.K. The meeting rooms seemed a bit cold and barren and the kitchen was very small. The other spaces seemed well handled. Their gym had 12' tall double doors for moving equipment, a good idea.

Pub!i c
CENTER NAME: Mai ley Senior Citizen Recreation Center
ADDRESS: 3380 S. Lincoln, Englewood, Colorado
APPROXIMATE SIZE: 1^,000 ft2 APPROXIMATE COST: $1.2 million
including furnishings
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2; $85-7 DATE: 1977
ARCHITECT: R.R.S. (Ron Rinker)
FACILITIES INDOORS: Multi-Purpose Room with fold-out stage
Meeting Room (divides into 2 and opens into multi-purpose) Activities Room (divides into 2)
2 Crafts Rooms--Wet and Dry with storage between
Dark Room
Kitchen (complete)
Offices
Coat Rack and Restrooms (Men's and Women's)
Game Lounge ("noisy") with fireplace Library ("quiet") with fireplace
OUTDOORS: Open area north of building
Shuffleboard and basketball at south end
COMMENTS:
This is considered the finest senior center in operation in this area.
It was built to serve the 10,000 Englewood citizens over 55 and gets participants from many other communities, as well. Obviously it is designed with complete handicap access. It also has lots of familiar natural materials like wood and brick, and lots of natural light. It's fairly centrally located and is across the street from an elderly housing building. They have a full kitchen even though at the moment, meals are catered. The center is only open during daylight hours because many seniors have poor eye-sight and feel more threatened and vulnerable in twilight and darkness. The multi-purpose room and its tie to the meeting room, kitchen, storage, and convenient access to the main entry make the space very versatile. It also has one large window with a shade that is a movie screen, and a fold-out stage against one wall. All of the spaces are well equipped for full and varied use.

CENTER NAME: Littleton Y.M.C.A.
ADDRESS: 2233 W. Sheperd Ave. Littleton, Colorado
Pr i vate
APPROXIMATE SIZE: 2A,250
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2; $26.A (not a representative i nd i cator)
APPROXIMATE
DATE: 1952 1959 I96A 1969
1972
197A
1978
COST: $6A0,000
- house Â£ outdoor pool
- leadership building
- lobby and indoor pool ($65,000)
- health club (finished existing
space $25,000)
- renovated outdoor pool and added wading pool
- gym ($230,000)
- A HB/RB courts ($252,000)
ARCHITECT: Bill Haldeman (most recent)
FACILITIES INDOORS: Gym (661 X 92')
Pool (35' X 65')
A HB/RB Courts
Health Club (Steam Room, Sauna, Work-out Room, Lounge, Locker Room)
Pre-School A Meeting Rooms
Locker Room/Shower Room (Men's and Women's) Ki tchen
Men's and Women's Restrooms 6 Offices Coat Room Storage
OUTDOORS: Pool (75' X A5')
COMMENTS:
It is typical of Y.M.C.A.s to build in phases. They start very simply and develop some programs for the community. Then they fund raise and build and develop new programs and this just keeps cycling. One thing which surprised me, but was true at each Y.M.C.A. I visited, was that they had rooms that weren't used or were just loaded with junk, not storage. It seems like constant expansion is a basis of their existence.
The Littleton "Y" doesn't give much sense of vitality when you walk in; it could be a school or an office building; there are no bright colors or dynamic space; it's not very welcoming. The center, itself, offers some good facilities, but you don't see them unless you really look for them.
The gym and the handball courts seemed fairly well designed, and the preschool room was being used in a really constructive way; but none of these areas or any of the others had any special quality or character. Their control system is quite tight but requires two people to operate it; this is partly because the center is built in two stories, but those same two stories help make it a fairly compact building.

Private
CENTER NAME: Jefferson County Y.M.C.A.
ADDRESS: 11050 W. 20th Avenue, Lakewood
APPROXIMATE SIZE: 28,000 ft2
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2; $40 (not a representative ind icator)
Colorado
APPROXIMATE COST: $1.12 million
DATE: 1969 leadership ($90,000)
197^ Pool, Locker Rooms,
Weight Rooms ($575,000)
1978 Gym ($^50,000 complete
cost, including furnishings and a 11 fees)
ARCHITECT: Lee Â£ Associates
FACILITIES INDOORS: Pool (25 yds X 5 lanes)
Gym (1001 X 801) double court with track Weight Room (Universal)
Lobby/Lounge
^ HB/rb Courts under construction April 1979 A Meeting Rooms 8 Offices 2 Reception Desks
Locker Room/Shower Room (Men's and Women's) Men's and Women's Restrooms
OUTDOORS: Track (1/3 mile) 2 Tennis Courts
COMMENTS:
There is fairly good light and some nice use of materials, particularly an earth tone brick, which make this "Y" pleasant. The entry is under-sized and a bit dark but once inside one gets some good contact with what's going on there. The lobby overlooks the pool and is by the entry, and, as the director said, this really attracts memberships people see good things going on and want to join. An elevated track around the gym is another major attraction to prospective members. There are a number of windowless basement rooms which have a bad feel to them. The overall layout of this center seems fairly disorganized with two reception desks, but incomplete supervision; and excess and dead circulation space. It's interesting to note that my overall impression was most affected by the warm tones in the entry and lobby area -first impressions are very powerful. The director made two noteworthy recommendations; first, build as many lockers and shov/ers as possible, and second, build a cei mic tile pool with a sand and gravel filter. The reason for the pool recomr jndations is that the filter system and the ceramic tile cut down on maintefance time and therefore limit "down-time" on the pool and allow maximum use.

CENTER NAME: Schlessman Y.M.C.A.
ADDRESS: 3901 E. Yale Avenue, Denver, Colorado
Pr i vate
APPROXIMATE SIZE: Unknown APPROXIMATE COST: $1.5 million to present
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2: Unknown DATE: 1958 Leadership building, Pool
1961 Health club, Gym 1973 Outdoor tennis courts, (enclosed pool)
1979 3 HB/RB courts
ARCHITECT: Unknown
FACILITIES INDOORS: Gym (not full size)
Pool (25 yds X 5 lanes, "L" shape)
Health Club 3 HB/RB Courts
3 Meeting Rooms (nursery, pre-school)
7 Offices Reception Room
Locker Room (Men's and Women's)
Men's and Women's Restrooms Ki tchen
OUTDOORS: 2 Lighted tennis courts 1i acres sports fields
COMMENTS:
The entry here brings one right to the reception desk which works very well. Although the building is old it's not particularly gloomy; there is a fair bit of natural light particularly in the general public areas and meeting rooms. The activity areas have little or no natural light. Organization is better at this "Y" than at the other two, but supervision is still not centralized. There are lots of offices and they are spread out and it seems excessive. Most of the building is in good condition considering its age.

Private
CENTER NAME: Washington Park Community Center
ADDRESS: 622 E. Ohio Avenue, Denver Colorado
APPROXIMATE SIZE: A,200 ft2 APPROXIMATE COST: $230,000 for new
(for new building) building and
i mprovements
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2: Can't be DATE: 1 existing building (center
broken down has been in location 12 years
1 1978 building
ARCHITECT: B.R.S. (Ron Rinker)
FACILITIES INDOORS: "South Hall" Large meeting room (55' X 30',
divides, can accommodate about 200)
Dining Room (90 people)
Kitchen complete
Old dining room (meeting room)
Old kitchen (teaching kitchen)
Pre-school A Offices
2 Men's and Women's Restrooms OUTDOORS: Play area for pre-school
COMMENTS:
This is a nifty small center. It includes a re-use of an old church and an attractive new building on a very tight corner lot. The scale, brick, wood doors, exposed trusses and finishes create a comfortable feeling. There seems to be a warm human quality about the place. The entry is well protected from the weather and brings people to a good point within the building. The new building is all on one level and there are no steps up to the entry so handicap access is very easy. The old building is on two levels and ramps are not feasible. The pre-school on the upper floor of the old building is a bright, cheerful and active learning center. The downstairs of the old building is nothing special one way or the other. There are some acoustical problems in the two large rooms in the new building that will have to be worked out, also the new kitchen is not well laid out. The most obviously lacking facility is a lounge area.

Publ ic
CENTER NAME: Washington Park Recreation Center
ADDRESS: 701 S. Franklin Street, Denver, Colorado
APPROXIMATE SIZE: 21,000 ft2 APPROXIMATE COST: $500,000
(Arch Fee 17,000 Const b~]2,b2k Landscape 13,827 503,251
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2; $23.8 DATE: 1971
ARCHITECT: Ron Rinker (A.B.R.)
FACILITIES INDOORS: Pool (25 m X 15m), capacity 325 people
Gym (regulation high school)
Crafts Room with kitchenette Meeting Room Lounge All purpose Weight Room (capacity about 25)
2 Offices Basket Check
Men's and Women's Changing Room with showers and toilets Staff Restrooms (Men's and Women's)
OUTDOORS: Washington Park Boat i ng
Playground and Park Activities Jogg i ng Trail
COMMENTS:
Washington Park is large and attractive and is in a fairly densely populated neighborhood, and the recreation center is in the middle of the park. It is a good location. The center gets very heavy usage. As soon as one enters, there is activity going on and the reception desk oversees people's comings and goings. Unfortunately the desk does not have visual control of the gym and pool, the two largest spaces and both vulnerable to emergency problems. A related problem is that there is no ambulance access to the pool. There is good natural light, but some of the windows are basically inaccessible. Vibrant color and color accents add life to the environment. From the outside the scale of the center is somewhat deceiving because it has sloped and broken-up roofs which give an association to a much smaller residential scale; this is desirable because it makes the center less imposing and dominating of its location. A good comment made by the director was that the decision on the type of gym floor to have should depend on what kind of use it will get, lots of ball playing or a lot of multiple use.

Pub1i c
CENTER NAME: Martin Luther King Recreation Center
ADDRESS: 3880 Newport, Denver, Colorado
APPROXIMATE SIZE: 19,668 ft2 APPROXIMATE COST: over $950,000
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2; $50 DATE: 1979 with renovation of
1967 gym, weight room, dance room, and 1 office
ARCHITECT: Stansberry-Morris, 1565 Franklin, Denver
FACILITIES INDOORS: Pool (10 m X 25m)
Gym (31 short of full-size court, adequate side space)
1 HR/RB (201 X b0' no gallery)
Crafts (pottery, ceramics, sewing, kiln, photo lab) Weight Room
Cultural Room (dance, etc.)
3 Offices Library Basket Room Lobby/Game Area Sauna
Shower/Changing Room (Men's and Women's)
Men's and Women's Restrooms Staff Bathroom
OUTDOORS: 2 Softbal1 Fields
2 Basketball Courts b Tennis Courts Playground
1 Soccer Field
COMMENTS:
This is a brand new facility in an area with fairly high vandalism, it might be described as a tough neighborhood. This creates some special problems, the obvious one being to cut down on the potential for vandal damage. Another is control inside the building and limiting places for loitering. The control and loitering are effectively handled, but for some reason there are windows punched all around the outside at a very susceptable height so they are in the process of putting bars on all of them not good planning. A single bright red band v/rapping all around the outside of the building, contrasting the gray concrete block, adds a really good snap to the building's image.
The inside is not remarkable, it doesn't have any pizzazz, nor any horrors.
I think it would benefit tremendously from some use of bright colors and possibly super graphics; at present it's almost entirely an institutional blue-green. One unusual opportunity offered here is a library room to help bring books into the community.

Publi c
CENTER NAME: R.F.K. (La Familia) Recreation Center ADDRESS: 65 S. Elati Denver, Colorado APPROXIMATE SIZE: 17,821 APPROXIMATE COST: $1 million
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2: $56 DATE: 1979
ARCHITECT: Ramon Martinez
FACILITIES INDOORS: Pool (25 yds X 6 lanes) with 16" deep "kiddie" pool
Gym (full-size with maple floor)
Crafts Room with ceramics area Weight area
Shower/Toi1et/Changing (Men's and Women's)
1 Office
Reception/Basket Check-in Lounge/Game Area Men's and Women's Restrooms Staff Bathroom
OUTDOORS: Basketball and/or Handball
COMMENTS:
This brand new center is in a fairly dense neighborhood with a lot of Chicano and poor people. To reflect a sense of cultural heritage the building is adobe, it also has many rounded corners which has a pleasing effect. The adobe gives a natural earth tone both inside and out. The roof over the pool has two heights, one for the diving area and one for the rest of the pool enclosure. Supervision from the central reception/office area is good.
Because of cutting costs on the building, some areas, particularly the weight exercise area, were reduced in size and as a result their usefulness was severely handicapped.

Pub1ic
CENTER NAME: Harvey Park Recreation Center
ADDRESS: 2120 S. Tennyson Way, Denver, Colorado
APPROXIMATE SIZE: '9,169 APPROXIMATE COST: $336,638
(Arch fee 30,681.^9
Constr 277,53150
+ 1,575.00
Landscape 26,850-00
336,638.00
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT^: $30.27 Construction Cost (may not reflect existing bldg.
ARCHITECT: 01 if Nielson (Nei1son-Wa1ker)
FACILITIES INDOORS: Gym (not regulation size) with Pro-Turf
Crafts (divides in 2) with kiln room and dark room Weight Room
All-purpose Room (meeting, tumbling, etc.)
Staff Toilets
Shower/Toi1ets (Men's and Women's)
2 Offices
Check-in Counter/baskets OUTDOORS: Pool
Fenced in yard for boats, etc.
Boat ing
Playground and park activities
COMMENTS:
Quite a few of Denver's recreation centers are similar to this one; built with basic facilities and outdoor pool, and in a large park. Probably the most outstanding feature of this center is how well supervision works from the reception/bag check desk. Color is well used; the general color is a cheerful pale yellow, and some bright accents perk things up. The crafts room is well designed having some natural light, a divider, plenty of work space and storage. The Pro-Turf floor in the gym seems to be excellent.
It's easily maintained, repairable, holds its color and finish well and seems to cut down on injuries. There is no real loitering space in the building, and as soon as one enters there are all sorts of activities in view to help stimulate interest and involvement. The main problems here are heavy use and the limits of the facilities. Like many Denver recreation centers, the gym is too small for a regulation basketball court and the baskets are hazardously close to the walls; also the shower/changing rooms tend to be very barren, tight and somewhat oppressive.

Public
CENTER NAME: Berkeley Park Senior Recreation Center
ADDRESS: 5031 W. A6th Avenue, Denver, Colorado
APPROXIMATE SIZE: 6,310 ft2 APPROXIMATE COST: $201,000
(20,000 for site 17,000 for furniture)
(Arch Fee 20,750
Const r 163,213
Landscape 7,300
Misc. 11,000
202,263
APPROXIMATE COST PER FT2; $32 DATE: Opened in 1977
ARCHITECT: Ramon Martinez
FACILITIES INDOORS: Director's Office, Staff Office (Storage, Mechanical)
Kitchen (catered meals)
"Studio" with A0 X 70' Oak Dance Floor Lounge with fireplace and folding partition Men's and Women's Restrooms Uses craft room next door
OUTDOORS:
COMMENTS:
This is directly attached to the Berkeley Park Youth Recreation Center.
It was built as an addition and yet also a separate entity. The senior center uses some of the youth center facilities, but the youth center doesn't use the senior center spaces. The senior center has quite a bit of natural light. The studio is a large open space used for all sorts of things. One of its most frequent uses is for dance classes and dances and its oak floor is. excellent for that and works well for the classes, meals and other activities too. The studio has some bold color, but the rest of the center is subdued light tones. The fireplace is a nice feature. Operationally the only problem I heard about was that the offices didn't offer enough isolation from the seniors, because, if given the opportunity, the seniors will walk right into an office and interrupt whatever is going on. This isn't inherently bad, but as a constant situation it becomes difficult when someone really needs to concentrate on a task. The center defines seniors as age 50 and over. This creates two major types of users, those who are older and not too mobile and those who are younger and more active. There are different programs and activities suitable to each group, but the more mobile ones also are an aid to the less mobile. This is one of the few places where a senior facility and a youth facility are integrated and all parties concerned feel that it works well.

DEFINITION: The program Is a document, primarily verbal, that can be referred to throughout the design process to be sure that the intent of the client is not mistaken and to help avoid overlooking any aspects of previously established expectation.